Quantcast

Monday, July 28, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 15 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Hawaii lawmakers propose gun buyback program

By Anita Hofschneider

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 01:19 a.m. HST, Feb 01, 2013


Hawaii lawmakers want to spend $100,000 to get unwanted guns off the streets, saying it will help the state avoid a mass shooting like those seen in Colorado and Connecticut last year. 

A state Senate committee discussed a bill Thursday that would establish a gun buyback program, offering cash to people willing to give up firearms.

Proponents say the program would decrease opportunities for gun violence. They say guns were used in 19 percent of murders statewide in 2011.

Hawaii Rifle Association President Harvey Gerwig said the organization is only marginally opposed to the initiative because it doesn’t directly affect second amendment rights. 

But Gerwig said the proposed program would waste money and could lead to the destruction of historic guns.  

Similar programs in other states have unearthed unusual weapons, including a missile launcher in Seattle.

The state attorney general estimates that there are about 1 million guns in Hawaii.

The Senate public safety committee put off a decision on the bill until Feb. 7 to give the attorney general time to propose amendments.

The state rifle association has had success so far in the Legislature in stopping stricter gun measures from gaining traction. This week, more than 400 people spoke out against a bill that would have made firearm instructors liable for accidents that happen during training.

The organization is using word-of-mouth, media and online efforts to encourage pro-gun voices, Gerwig said, adding that the Legislature should instead focus on improving mental health.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 15 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(15)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
Maneki_Neko wrote:
It is not that this is a bad thing. But it is a waste of tax money. Study after study has shown buy back programs do not reduce the number of weapons in the hands of criminals or bad guys and do not reduce gun violence. It's pretty simple - bad guys do not turn in weapons and the weapons that do get turned in (many are just junk, useless stuff) were never going to be used for illegal activities anyway. It's just a "do something because it feels good" reaction by politicos who want some face time. But remember...that is YOUR $100,000 being thrown away on a proven useless program.
on January 31,2013 | 02:37PM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
Note the accompanying photo is of weapons seized when police raided a drug dealers house.

1-The drug dealer would not have turned these in.

2 - That $100,000 could fund more police raids of drug dealers houses.

3 - Why show a photo that does not relate to the story except to "suggest" that a buyback is somehow related to a raid on a drug dealer?


on January 31,2013 | 02:40PM
rigormortis wrote:
$100,000 will pay only for one middle manager's annual salary and benefits. You still need clerks, security, cashiers, offices, security cages, and disposal oversight.
on January 31,2013 | 03:23PM
kauai wrote:
Excellent points. I couldn't have stated this issue better than that. On a similar note, it's a shame that law-abiding citizens have to stand in line for 6-9 plus hours at HPD in order to obtain permits for, or to register their firearms. Couple of glaring procedural issues come to mind: 1) Having to fill out paperwork at the registration office instead of being able to fill them out in advance; 2) Closing the door on registrants at the end of the registration office's business day and forcing registrants to come back again -- if you're already in line, then simply post a person to monitor the end of the line when the end-of-business-day time comes around (don't punish the registrants because the office is too small to accomodate those already in line).
on January 31,2013 | 03:34PM
gth wrote:
There's only lines 'cause you wish to register the weapons ahead of any ban that the fed or state govt will enact.
on January 31,2013 | 03:51PM
tiki886 wrote:
No, the lines were caused by the Greatest Gun Salesman that ever lived - Obama!
on January 31,2013 | 04:40PM
bobbob wrote:
No kidding. This is a waste of tax money.
on January 31,2013 | 04:59PM
stopthespending wrote:
Just do an amenesty program - free!
on January 31,2013 | 03:38PM
onevoice82 wrote:
Automobiles kill more people in Hawaii then guns. I have a junk car in my driveway that I would like the state to buy-back from me. I'll take $500 please!
on January 31,2013 | 03:40PM
tiki886 wrote:
"Cash for clunkers"? That worked out pretty well didn't it? This is the gun version.
on January 31,2013 | 04:42PM
islandsun wrote:
Its the guns sitting around the house that could end up in the hands of a minor. Seems like all parents say they have that under control untill the next school shooting.
on January 31,2013 | 03:55PM
eas450 wrote:
AS IT IS FOR ALARM SYSTEMS, DRIVER LICENSING, & OTHER LICENSING SYSTEMS, MUCH OF THE INFORMATION IS NOT REVIEWED DAILY OR TARGETED FOR ANY PARTICULAR REASONS BY GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES. NOT FAMILIAR WITH WHAT HAPPENS TO THE GUN REGISTRATION INFO BUT IT WOULD SEEM THAT IT GOES NOWHERE & SEEMS TO JUST DISAPPEAR. USING AN ANNUAL GUN REGISTRATION WITH PERSONAL INFORMATION, GUN INFORMATION, PERHAPS AN ACQUISITION DATE AND A CHECK OFF WHETHER THE GUNOWNER HAS A GUN SAFE TO REDUCE THEFT OR IMPROPER USE OF THEIR GUNS MIGHT BE USEFUL. THE NAME CAN THEN BE RUN INTO WHATEVER SYSTEM TO DETERMINE ANY POTENTIAL NEGATIVE BACKGROUND WHICH MIGHT INDICATE A POTENTIAL DANGEROUS SITUATIONS. WHETHER THERE IS A NEED FOR PSYCHOLOGISTS, OR WHATEVER TO BE COMPELLED TO INDICATE A POTENTIAL NEGATIVE INFO WOULD SEEM TO BE OVERKILL AS A GUN OWNER IN THAT SITUATION HOPEFULLY IS BEING ANALYZED & THAT ISSUE ALSO BEING ADDRESSED. PERHAPS A WAIVER PROCESS CAN BE DEVELOPED WHERE THE PRACTITIONER CAN OPT TO ADVISE LAW ENFORCEMENT OF A POTENTIAL DANGER WITHOUT PENALTIES UNLESS THE NOTICE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT IS DEEMED NOT PROPER. OBVIOUSLY GUIDELINES NEED TO BE DEVELOPED, PERHAPS WITH PRACTITIONER INVOLVEMENT. JUST A THOUGHT.
on January 31,2013 | 05:02PM
aiea2 wrote:
Using CAPITOLS is hard to read.. so why do it ?
on January 31,2013 | 05:34PM
pizza wrote:
People who commit deliberate crimes with firearms will not be inclined to utilize a gun buyback program. Those particular guns would be treasured and more than likely maintained. I believe the legislature is throwing language together to pacify the public about a problem they really cannot solve so easily
on January 31,2013 | 06:38PM
Bumby wrote:
Want guns to be banned completely. This is the plan. A law that every adult must own a firearm. That means 95% of us will pass the test to have a firearm. The next 5 years gun related violence and death will sky rocket. But remember 95% of us passed the test. The passing of the test is a farce and a smoke screen. Good conscientious people will use it in the heat of rage. Only then will they realize that no one should own a firearm.
on January 31,2013 | 07:55PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs